JUST MARRY HIM?
Lori Gottlieb is raising a furore among women with her new book "Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr Good Enough". But her original article in the Atlantic provoked some sympathy from Adelle Waldman, whose response is republished here ...
Special to MORE INTELLIGENT LIFE
The Sex and the City movie was not the only big event in the public conversation about women and marriage last spring. For the thinking woman, the vapid romance flick likely took a backseat to the real head scratcher: Lori Gottlieb's controversial essay, "Marry Him! The case for settling for Mr. Good Enough", published in the Atlantic in March.
Don't wait for true love, Gottlieb argued--not if you are a woman in your 30s and you want to have a family. Romantic passion is not as important as a second pair of hands for diaper-changing and meal preparation. A single mom in her early 40s who got pregnant by artificial insemination, Gottlieb has earned some street cred on the subject.
If I had read her essay five years ago, I would have been scornful. Now, I'm 31 and a lot more sympathetic. I'm no longer able to write her off as one of those bitter marriage-crazed women I was sure I'd never be.
Gottlieb gets a lot right about what it's like to be a heterosexual, middle-class, single woman in her 30s, and how different it is from being a heterosexual, middle-class single woman in her 20s. What took me by surprise is the extent to which the change is palpable, even for women like me, who haven't been planning their dream wedding since girlhood; who are in fact ambivalent about babies and marriage.
The truth about turning 30 is that the question of marriage, and by extension dating, becomes much more angst-ridden. "Every woman I know," wrote Gottlieb, "no matter how successful and ambitious, how financially and emotionally secure--feels panic, occasionally coupled with desperation, if she hits 30 and finds herself unmarried." I think panic overstates it, let alone desperation, but Gottlieb is right that something big changes for women around that age.
Dating, however little fun you thought it was in your 20s, becomes even more fraught. It is not just heartbreak over a particular guy or general loneliness that keeps you up at night. Those will still be there, but on top there will be a new worry, the one about winding up alone. When you were younger, that sounded preposterous and melodramatic--because no matter how upset you were in the moment, deep down you believed you'd find your Mr Right eventually. Now, it seems like "eventually" may be too late.
*****
This is a sad moment of reckoning, perhaps especially for smart, independent-minded women. Surely such anxieties over finding a husband belonged to a different sort of woman: someone more conventional, more girlish, less interesting. As a woman who was never on a marriage track, I and many of my friends held up being contentedly single as a virtue, something to aspire to. Many of us believed we needed to learn how to be okay on our own before we could be ready to settle down. Serial monogamists seemed a little weak, somehow.
But alas, biology does not wait for professional, personal and psychological fulfilment. And suitable husbands rarely appear on the scene the very moment their presence is desired.
Meanwhile, it's not just the woman who gets older, but her parents too. Younger women can readily laugh off hints about grandkids, but as the years pile on and the parents' health grows less robust, it sinks in that they won't be around forever. Their desire to know their grandkids becomes more poignant.
These realisations, rooted in biology and unmoved by career ambitions and other pursuits of fulfilment, can lead to a gradual change of perspective. Our earlier attempts to find contentment on our own, once seen as the height of sophistication, can now appear a tad immature. It turns out that all of life is not quite like college, designed primarily to foster personal growth. Those women who were so uninterestingly preoccupied with marriage in their early 20s now seem somewhat smarter in retrospect. Or at least more shrewd.
Even women who are absolutely sure they don't want marriage and kids find that dynamics of dating change. The power tilts increasingly towards men, who have a larger pool of single women at their disposal. Many of us who were once cavalier about being on our own soon discover the urge to assert that we are single by choice. We are more eager to trot out stories of the rejections delivered; the suitors left wanting. We are terribly off-hand in describing our doubts about having children to men (oh how laid back and unpresuming we sound). In other words, we are left wondering whether this isn't simply a different brand of husband-hunting.
*****
Perhaps I sound like a bitter single woman, one who messed up and has discovered it's too late. But that's not at all true. I'm glad not to have married any of the guys I dated in my 20s, and I'm happy with my boyfriend (whom I met when I was in my 30s). I'm not trying to imply that women in their 20s ought to marry at any cost to avoid a terrible fate; I simply feel that it's better to be honest about the negatives than to pretend that there are none.
Unlike Gottlieb, I do not advocate settling. I still believe that if marrying a certain man doesn't feel right, then there is something wrong.
Yet I think Gottlieb has done something important in writing so candidly about her own romantic regrets. She debunks the vapid "You go, girl!" form of empowerment, which often harms women by suggesting that they shouldn't settle for less than everything. As a television series, Sex and the City dramatised some of the challenges (and perks) of looking for love as a mature woman. Unfortunately its big-screen culmination delivered a very Hollywood ending--fluffily satisfying, but hardly representative. Gottlieb, in contrast, tells her story as if she were speaking to a roomful of adults, who can be trusted not to faint at bad news.
"Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr Good Enough" (Dutton), by Lori Gottlieb, out now (Adelle Waldman has written for the New York Times Book Review, the Village Voice and the New York Observer, among other outlets. Based in New York, she is working on a novel about unmarried women.)
Article tools
- Login to post comments
Email this page- Printer-friendly version
Delicious
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Comments
Agreed Adelle, just like any
July 3, 2008 - 07:53 — Sebastian K (not verified)Agreed Adelle, just like any other negotiation, if you ultimately feel you can't walk away because of whatever reason, you are ultimately risk being pressured in to an unhappy settlement. Behaviour refined over millions of years of evolution is hard to fight...
Please make it stop!
July 3, 2008 - 12:45 — Marilyn in Chicago (not verified)Please stop feeding the gender-role monster by publishing soul-searching articles about marriage ("don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those conventional women, and yet..."), making babies (ew, keep it to yourself), and what kind of guys are the best (breathing and nonviolent or heart-palpitatingly exciting, etc etc). This is called "More Intelligent Life" not "More Lifestyle Fluff".
there are already too many
July 6, 2008 - 02:01 — Visitor (not verified)there are already too many people overpopulating this world. why bring new people into this world? women should stop making children altogether. think of how many resources each new baby uses, abuses, and wastes.
Re: Debunking "You go, girl!" form of empowerment
July 8, 2008 - 00:20 — Visitor (not verified)Agree Adelle - I live a continent away in India, where many marriages are still 'arranged' and empowerment a new term for many millions of women around me. Yet, although I was brought up by a feminist family (a decided minority group in much of India), I don't see why feminism needs to be about rejecting womanhood.
Independence, feminisim and economic and career equations apart, many smart independent women are still playing the game by someone else's rules. We women don't always look into our own hearts to decide what we want to do - we are as much influenced by peer pressure around career and `achievement' as we pity those succumbing to `domestic' considerations.
Why is it ok to be analytical about our spreadsheets but not about our lives? Why do we women wrap our motives and our needs in clouded thinking and buy into others' expectations of us? A clear hard look at the real choices avaiable to us will enable us to make decisions that are best in the long run - concerns around our future prompt us to invest our money wisely, why not take a similar view of our personal lives.
A culture of seeking self fulfilment has fuelled a search for personal gratification and therefore a Mr Right. Mr Good should be the choice, if not Mr Good Enough. There is greater love, mutual respect, tenderness and empathy called for in sharing our imperfect selves with another imperfect person - and loving each other at the end of a life together.
Instead of buying into the `feminist' agenda while rejecting the `domestic' agenda, we would do better to place emotional well being ahead of the commonly accepted notion of romantic love and make our choices based on what we women really want.
Personally, I too looked around me for Mr Right, and married Mr Good. From a purely practical viewpoint, I would even advise my daughters (I have two) to marry earlier than I did, have children earlier than I did and space them closer together. Women can not only get the babies part of it over earlier in their lives and when careers still don't involve too many responsibilities and travel. That way women can trust to youth to help them through the early years with the kids and hit the thirties running.
While considerations of parenting and grandparenting may sound like a freaky, if not downright ridiculous, reason to marry Mr Good instead of waiting for Mr Right, it is undeniable that parenting and life choices are easier and enjoyable when we are younger. So would grandparenting be too, I am sure.
Agree with the comments of
July 11, 2008 - 12:57 — Visitor (not verified)Agree with the comments of the author and Gottlieb. In addition to the reasons they've cited--which mostly pertained to a woman's desire to have a family and her biological clock ticking--I have found in my personal journey that those men who invoked great emotional and physical passion in me in my 20s were just manisfetations of longings unfulfilled during my childhood. There was great "love" and passion, but a whole lot of pain. It is difficult to define love. In my 20s, I thought that constant longing and pain for a man meant romantic love. I have had to recreate the meaning of that word for me in order to find and maintain a healthy relationship. Like the commentator in India, I have found Mr. Good. It took a bit of trying and getting used to in the beginning, because I also consider myself a smart and independent woman and did not want to settle. But in time, I realized that all that were missing were the longings and the pains...because he was so there. And I have found peace and happiness that come from shared joys, honest communication and really getting to know a man like I have never known before.
To all the "feminist" critics of Gottlieb out there - I have found that life is just not that simple. Priorities and levels of self-awareness/knowledge change over time. And they will continue to change. There is nothing wrong with giving men who you're not used to a fair chance. You might even find that he will surprise you and was just the person you needed.
This is sexist because
July 11, 2008 - 22:14 — m Andrea (not verified)no one is writing claptrap directed at men saying, "Yanno guys, maybe you should lower your expectations".
However, if you had written, "Attention Parents! Stop encouraging your girls to want to be a princess and your boys to be such jerks" -- then I'd be thrilled.
Whatever happened to those Sweet Sixteen parties anyway? The girls could look forward to being a princess with a fancy dress party, and then get it out of their system that way. Because the way things are now with all the pink pink pink marketing crap, the girls are in a hurry to make their wedding day fill the same need... And so they kiss any old toad, just to get to the alter faster.
And I don't know what the author experienced, but it appears the vast majority of girls are still being trained to believe that they absolutely must have a man or they're nothing. Hogwash, enjoy your free time!
and flying Solo can be an option now....
July 12, 2008 - 02:42 — Pemo Theodore (not verified)And flying solo can be an option nowadays..... I have just turned 56 & in all those years & to date in the many varied areas of life & different countries traveled I have not met a man with whom I would consider to hook up, who would make it worthwhile giving up my freedom & independence. However for many years I like many young women of varying ages searched for someone who would be able to meet me & add value to my life. I guess that's really the point, if a relationship doesn't add value, why go there? It's like a business deal, if it doesn't add value, its a deal breaker! I don't think it is too much to ask of men in general or relationships that they need to be able to offer some value to the opposite sex. A shared journey can make a difference if both contribute benefit to each other!
Does the end really justify the means?
July 20, 2008 - 16:51 — Visitor (not verified)Has anyone thought to examine how the women who settled wind up after they have those babies? How long do these marriages last?
If you know you are settling on someone just to get married, have babies and so you don't wind up by yourself, this is essentially an extremely desperate measure. I would rather feel the occasional twang of desperation in finding a soul mate than to find myself daily living a life of desperation with false pretenses.
As a single, middle class, heterosexual woman in her early 30s, I would like to state here that I have not ever felt desperate to find a husband. I certainly have not felt a sense of panic about not getting married ever, or about being alone for the rest of my life. I don't need a man in my life to be happy and a realtionship does not define who I am. Unfortunately, for some women I know, getting/being married has also become more of a measure of success, a milestone in achievement and something to be smug about, rather than being about happiness. This is what I find so sad about those who choose to settle, that the meaning of marriage is completely lost.
I find that those who are desperate to get married is generally linked to wanting children, primarily because of that ticking clock. Sadly, it seems that those are the most vocal (and only) females paid attention to in analyzing how women think and behave in the dating world. Though this article points out that there are some women who claim to be ambivalent, the end argument is that they really aren't. What is that about? Why blatantly ignore the fact that there actually are some women who really don't care if they get married or have babies? It's plain condescending and presumptuous to assume all women would want to be married.
Another interesting statement here is this increasing power shift to men and the defensiveness of women in being single. Well, what about the men? Why aren't they defensive about being single? It's about societal expectations which are old fashioned and need to change. Am I now presumed to be undesirable unless I prove otherwise? Is there some assumption that because I am in my 30s, all the men I have dated in the past have dumped me because they didn't want to marry me? How ridiculous. Women give the power to men by acting defensively, as if these notions were true. Defensive behavior acknowledges these silly notions and perpetuates them as acceptable.
However, in the end, this really should all be about personal happiness, not about marriage. The real question for women to ask themselves is - would I be happier having settled, having babies while looking at a probable divorce down the road, or not having gotten married at all?
re: there are already too many
August 16, 2008 - 01:27 — Visitor (not verified)I don't think your comment is right. Wether it's overpopulating the world or not, having children is part of keeping the world go round.
Troubled
December 23, 2008 - 10:40 — Visitor (not verified)As a 30 year old, single woman, I am deeply troubled by this notion! Are you serious that the only consideration would be your biological clock?!? That's INSANE. Babies are not like little toy dolls you know...They REQUIRE love from mom & dad. So, if you married just to get knocked up and have some weird picket fence fantasy, good luck when you raise the little psycho kid.
If a woman or man is desperate enough to marry someone JUST for the sake of being married, they need a psychologist, not a priest.
Sheesh.
>there are already too many
December 25, 2008 - 16:27 — Mark81 (not verified)>there are already too many people overpopulating this world. why bring new people into this world? women should stop making children altogether. think of how many resources each new baby uses, abuses, and wastes.
I think so.
I think your missing the
January 6, 2009 - 12:33 — Visitor (not verified)I think your missing the point when you say people should make the most of it and be alone. Its lonely alone for years and years and no amount of self-empowerment etc etc will stop a woman's urge to settle down and maybe have children. It is down to a biological clock and her urge as a woman. Maybe similar in a way to a man's urge to procreate. We are animals at the end of the day with needs.
I agree girl's shouldn't be too princess-like but that said if these girl's love themselves they won't be tempted to put up with some jerk. Low self-esteem harbours crap relationships with losers.
Sorry this point was made to
January 6, 2009 - 12:38 — Visitor (not verified)Sorry this point was made to one higher up. Some people want to get married, some people don't. I find it easier being single but also lonelier. But that said I would always rather be single than with someone I wasn't in love with or at least loved. The trouble is Mr Good is often reliable but dull and if he is just there because of woman's biological need for a baby maybe it is true and once he has served his purpose divorce is on its way. After all we all want to live the most interesting life possible.
What if?
February 5, 2009 - 13:55 — Visitor (not verified)What if the man you have is good looking, kind, generous, considerate, well educated, shares your interests, is curious about the world, shares many of your same desires and wants, would make an excellent father/homeowner/husband, intelligent, and all the other things that you have said that you want and that make for a great long-term companion and you just aren't passionate about him? One thing is clear: he is in love with you.
Let's say you are fast approaching 30. Let's say you have a big career and live in a huge, vast city, let's say that you have always wanted a big family. Let's say that you are pragmatic and rational, and let's say that you have always wanted to be "in love," and that you have before, and that you know its pitfalls. And let's say that you see the pros outweighing the cons (the only one: you're not nuts about him). The pros: see above long list.
What then, fellow smart ladies? What....then. Where does the myth meet reality? To marry that man I "loved" would have meant settling on about 5,000 other levels. To marry this man I am settling only on one. But is that one good enough?
The feminist in me wants to hang on for love. The realist in me says "grow up." And I don't think its about waiting to be "happy" or "fulfilled" because when I was with the man I loved, I was more than unhappy most of the time and never felt fulfilled. With this man, I am never unhappy, I just feel a dull ache occasionally when I wish for that Prince Charming to show up. The ideal version would be that we're BOTH nuts for each other. Does this really exist? What percentage of couples feel this way about each other? Or, to rephrase, what percentage of couples feel this way about each pother 5 years in to marriage? I'm a woman who likes to know the odds before placing a bet. If the odds are 50:1, I'm not playing this game anymore.
The issue is a complicated one, and to simplify it on either side, from the feminist or the realist standpoint, is to deny its importance.
I just wish I knew who was right.
Gottlieb and Waldman are both right
February 11, 2009 - 19:40 — Ash (not verified)I think Gottlieb has some very salient points which I and most of my friends can identify with. Time is of the essence and if we don't grab the opportunity, we could miss out for the rest of our lives. I met my husband in my mid-30s and am one of the fortunate ones but many women I know left it too late and missed out on having children. If you want to have children, you should definitely compromise to the extent that you marry someone you can love, but you should not hold out for someone perfect or you risk losing it all.
Re "What if?" - I am in exactly the same situation!
February 13, 2009 - 07:38 — Visitor (not verified)Your situation sounds like a mirror image of my own. I am guessing we are of the same age and I have the same dilemma but I was unsure that anyone else shared it. The rest of my girlfriends are getting married and don't voice any of the above questions but I don't believe that they are all so doubt free, I am sure many are settling. Maybe they are the wise ones and as you say we need to "grow up" or maybe it is right to hang on for "the full package + passion", if that even exists...I really don't know...
I would love to PM you on this as I maybe we can help eachother come to some kind of conclusion! Let me know if you would like to discuss this further.
Thank you so much for your comment!
March 8, 2009 - 02:01 — Visitor (not verified)I've been struggling with the same issues for the past six months. Last year, I got out of a seven year relationship with an amazing man. I was convinced for at least 5 of the years that he was Mr. Right because I worshipped his intellect, his compassion and his capacity to empathize with everyone around him. I was lucky enough to be able to savor that excruciating feeling of unfulfilled longing with the man I actually lived with! It wasn't perfect. He didn't believe in conventional romance especially when it came down to things I REALLY longed for...For example, he would write poetry everyday, but none of it would ever be about me and this was on purpose. The sex department also left much to be desired. His intellect, what I worshipped most about him though, was eventually what drove him away and turned him into a entirely different person - a person I wasn't in love with and who wasn't in love with me anymore either.
Six months ago, a knight in shining armour type guy sauntered into my life. He treats me with the utmost respect and adoration, he's the most handsome and sexiest man I've ever met in my life, he's intelligent, writes me love poems and love letters, and cooks dinner + cleans my entire house + does the laundry + plays with my cats when I'm too busy studying to do it myself. He's traveled with world, is open to all sorts of new experiences, and is also an extrememly compassionate person. What's missing? That sense of unfulfilled longing that I always associated with passion....and also a college education and by extension ability to think more critically about, well, everything.
I'm about to turn thiry next year. I graduate from veterinary school in two years and so will soon be fulfilling my life career goals. Having children is now a priority in my life and I feel strongly about having them before I turn 35 for several reasons - parents getting older, being able to raise them while I still have youthful energy and age of my eggs. Amazing men don't come around that often, and even after they do you have to spend a while building up the relationship, and this man is INCREDIBLE.
I love this man very very very much and I have no desire to be with anyone else right now. But the fact that I don't feel that "passion" and "intellectual worship" I felt for my last boyfriend, and for maybe one other person in my life, is very unsettling to me. But how important are those things anyway? Don't they eventually fade with time anyway - as evidenced by my last relationship? This guy I have now is in it for the long haul and let's me know in no uncertain terms (and in a very gentlemanly knight in shining armour type way - while on one kneee and taking my hand in his) that he intends to treat me like a princess and take care of me for the rest of my life. Most women should be so lucky. Am I supposed to give all this up in search of a man that has all these wonderful qualities but ALSO inspires profound passion in me? A man I most likely won't find?
I think the answer is no. This amazing man has earned my devotion with everything he is and everything he does. He's not perfect but neither am I. So what if I don't get butterflies in my stomach? The level of respect, consideration, devotion and romance in my current relationship runs so much deeper than any surge of endorphins and hormones ever could. It will take work, it will be about focusing on what I have (which is a lot) more than what I don't have (which really isn't much at all). In the end, I think this relationship will be stronger than I ever thought it could be.
Wow, typing that out really helped me think things through. Thank you to anyone who was patient enought to read all of that :)
re: what if?
March 10, 2009 - 12:09 — Visitor (not verified)Wow. I felt like I was reading my own life story. I am 28 years old and have been with my boyfriend for 2 years. I blame Disney films for my huge fairytale complex...I have always thought that my prince was going to come someday and sweep me off my feet and we would have this wonderful life of passion and romance. Well, with my b/f, mostly all the ducks line up. He is the best man I have ever known, he treats me like gold, we have similar interests and he is always there for me. He is also very romantic and sweet and is so loving. He wants to marry me and I am so hesitant and I don't know why. The passion has gone out of our relationship, we don't have the hot exciting sex we once did, but I still love being affectionate with him and cuddling, kissing. But, that passion really bothers me. It really makes me wonder if we are right for each other if things have dwindled. I think I am caught up in this hollywood image. It doesn't help either that the only advice I get from people when asking about "how do you know he is the one?" is the response, "You just know." or even worse, "If you have to ask that, he isn't the one." I am so confused. I often see him as the father of my children someday but I am also afraid of over time the passion dwindles so low that we wind up with a brother/sister rel'p.
Wondering if you are still ambivalent?
October 7, 2009 - 08:40 — Visitor (not verified)I was blown away after reading your post. You just described my life. I realize this post is somewhat old, and if you don't mind my asking, where do you stand right now with this?
well-said
November 15, 2009 - 16:27 — Roxanne (not verified)There are so many fallacies in the idea of whom we should marry, what the ideal man looks like, how important motherhood is... why should there be one right answer when women are infinitely different. I am secure enough in my choices to want women free to exercise their own, even if it is radically different from mine. Feminism, at its finest core, should allow women the right to determine their own lives, regardless of anyone else's opinions, right?
Thank you for articulating your viewpoint so beautifully.
Gosh I'm reading this 9
November 24, 2009 - 05:45 — Visitor (not verified)Gosh I'm reading this 9 months on and all I can say is you just described the life with the man who would be "good enough" by definitions inferred throughout this article and I walked away and I STILL don't know who's right. Had any luck figuring this one out?
Re: what if?
December 7, 2009 - 16:24 — Visitor (not verified)It's insane to read those posts after "what if"'s response- it seems like we are all experiencing VERY similar situations. I got out of a 6 year relationship a few years ago with someone I'd call my "first love" The passion, anxiety, all the ups and downs- we had that. In general, he is a wonderful man, but we ended up not being the best for each other and eventually seperating. It was one of the most difficult experiences of my life, if not the most.
I'm now 27 and have been dating the same man for 2 years. He is wonderful- attentive, kind, smart, funny as hell, handsome and sexy. He wants the same things I do, he is adventurous and fun, he loves my dog as much as I do, and I'm always happy with him. However, those "butterflies" have never been there for me really. Maybe a little bit at the very begining, but not now.
So here's what I wonder- would I be settling by marrying him? No, I think not. I'm incredibly lucky to have someone in my life who I know will make a great partner. But I have had those anxieties- ie, shouldn't we have more of that "it" factor? That incredibly deep connection that I had before?
Honestly, after spending a lot of time thinking about this and talking it out (therapy, friends, mom, you name it), I've basically come to the conclusion that I do want to be with him, and that it may actually be something to do with my age. Does anyone else feel that way? That we're at a period of development in our life where all those crazy puppy dog feelings might disappear, because we're being more practical in who we choose for a partner?
I'd be curious to hear people's responses...
re: What if?
December 9, 2009 - 17:58 — Angela (not verified)It's fascinating that this conversation is still alive a year and a half after the original post. Just to throw a monkey wrench into the works, I have to advocate for holding out for the guy that you both are incredibly passionate about, and is Mr. Good.
I dated, for almost four years, that guy that everyone in this thread seems to be dating currently - he was incredibly kind, athletic, very smart (degree from Oxbridge), well travelled, adventurous, curious, attractive, etc. He was a great cook, did more than half of his fair share around the house, and will make an excellent husband and father. We were great friends. But, the passion wasn't there, and that was manifested a) in a stagnating intellectual life between us and b) a dwindling sex life. By the end we were having sex once every 3 or 4 months at best, and in retrospect I see that as a symptom of our underlying inability to connect.
It was very, very difficult, but when it came down to a point when I felt like we either needed to marry or part ways, I decided to part ways. I ended up going off and living somewhere in Asia for several years after that, which basically meant several years of enforced celibacy. While I was abroad I spent a large amount of time and emotional energy figuring out myself romantically and sexually.
When I returned, I started dating someone that, if I believed in those kinds of things, I would say was made somewhere in the stars just for me. Like my ex, he is also incredibly smart, well-educated, kind, giving, very well-travelled, extremely adventurous, etc. Plus, smoking hot. But unlike with my ex, we connect and understand each other deeply because we are fundamentally very similar people. We can converse authentically on emotional and intellectual topics. Sexually, we are ridiculously compatible, and we have crazy chemistry. There are strange things about us, characteristics that we thought that no person could ever love, but would only tolerate - and yet we happen to share them and can love them about each other. We share many secrets. We aren't without our challenges, but because we view the world with a very similar lens, we are able to work through problems with a healthy and compassionate dialogue.
Every morning, I wake up and roll over and look at him and feel thankful.
I think there is something of a false dichotomy that is being perpetuated here - between that passionate feeling, and between the Good Guy who treats you well. Although my Good Guy was very kind to me, ultimately my relationship with my current partner is much stronger and healthier, because of the passion between us. Because of that passion, underlying every discussion, whether mundane or serious, is a strong and intense bond that sustains us during more difficult times.
To get here took years of thought before breaking up with my ex, and years of self-reflection while I was single, but in the end it was worth every second.
I can't believe I'm still
December 26, 2009 - 23:40 — Visitor (not verified)I can't believe I'm still reading articles like this. What irks me is Gottlieb's assertion that women are all in a state of panic if they're still unmarried at age 30. I'm 46 and unmarried and frankly, cannot recall a period of "desperation" where I felt an urgent need to find a mate. I also have never wanted children and although I can certainly respect the fact that other women do, it still seems that marriage and motherhood are viewed as the crowning glory of womens' achievements. This idea that a woman is "alone" if she lacks a mate or a child continues to perplex me. Don't friends count? Relatives? Pets? Or what about enjoying the fruits of dating and letting whatever happens, happen rather than constantly agonizing over whether or not this person is "the one?" Or what about using the time not spent in a relationship and investing it in new interests, volunteer work or travel? I totally get it that Gottlieb's intended audience for this article are those women who want to marry and become mothers, but come on, is life for these women going to be so bleak if it doesn't happen and is it all really worth it for women to compromise themselves and their standards? Personally, I find it much more encouraging to read about women who stay true to themselves- whether they are married, single, have children or not. And, as others have commented, why aren't men encouraged to settle? Same old, same old.
At least Adelle (and most of
December 27, 2009 - 13:04 — Visitor (not verified)At least Adelle (and most of those who commented)has a boyfriend. It is human nature to want a partner in life, even if you do not want children. Everyone settles in some degree- you just have to make the most of what you have. It's much better than being alone forever. I agree with Gottlied completely and was willing to accept all of the imperfections of our relationship, unfortunately he didn't feel the same. Sometimes the choice will be taken away from you, so you should choose togetherness over righteous isolation.
Because most men don't have to settle
December 27, 2009 - 13:17 — Visitor (not verified)Most men have no problem finding someone and getting married if that is what they want. And women want to get married for the same reason that people do everything else- they want to feel like the most important person in someone's life. They want to feel loved, and if that's pathetic to you, then I'm proud to be pathetic. Friendships take a backseat to families, parents die, The only relationships that have a chance at being forever are your kids, your immediate family. If you don't have that, you always run the risk of ending up alone. It's the harsh reality. Have you ever been to a nursing home and seen the people that never married, no one to visit them. They die alone. What do you people think is going to happen to you when you're 80. We live longer now- so they'll be even more time to be alone. But we get to say we never settled! Give me a break. They'll be no one to tell how proud you are of that.
I'm a 40 something woman who
December 29, 2009 - 18:38 — Visitor (not verified)I'm a 40 something woman who has never married or had children, although I'm currently in a relationship with someone. I agree that most people want to partner up, but I think there is more than one acceptable lifestyle choice. I have no idea whether I'll marry my current boyfriend, but even if I did, there is certainly no guarantee he'll be with me forever. He's a decade older than I am and statistically, he's more likely to die before me. People are living longer now, but due to advances in health care and people (for the most part) taking better care of themselves, it's not an absolute certainly that a person will become feeble and incapacitated in their 80's. I recently lost my mother. She was 80 years old and could put many people half her age to shame. (she died in an accident- it wasn't health related). She had been divorced for 30 years and never had the desire to remarry. I'm sure she had her bouts of loneliness as we all do, but she refused to dwell on it. Instead she made the choice to live fully, and live she did. She worked until she was in her 70's at a job she loved. She had a variety of interests, was a community activist and had a large circle of friends. She took excellent care of her health- a vegetarian for almost twently years and worked out at the gym several times a week. Her "young" sixty-something friends refused to go walking with her, because they couldn't keep up! She still had many, many people she could depend on even though she wasn't married. Granted, anyone can be struck down by disease, even at an early age, but that's the risk we take in this thing called life. The point is, there are no guarantees, whether you marry or not. Much of it is a trade off. Some people value their independence to such an extent that they are willing to put up with a little loneliness. However, it's up to an individual to make the choice to compensate for that. Many close friends can become almost like extended family. Giving back to one's community like my mother did can be extremely satisfying and fulfilling. I know a number of folks who complain about being lonely, but don't make any effort to take up new activities or get involved with something meaningful, which would result in making connections- (possibly even a romantic interest if that's what they're looking for.) I think a marriage partnership can be extremely satisfying as well, although I would caution anyone to get married just because they are afraid of being alone. I've witnessed several marriages where the couple can't even stand to look at one another, but they stay together- even after the kids are grown- and grow more despondent every day. No relationship (no matter what kind) is a guarantee. I certainly did not expect to lose my healthy, vibrant mother as soon as I did.
My situation sounds very
January 1, 2010 - 21:06 — MANCHESTER (not verified)My situation sounds very similar except that i was dating a married man for 8 years during wich tinme he had 2 children . i eventually left him and after 2 years he finally got a divorce and has now proposed 3 times, im not in love with him anymore although i love him if that makes any sense and he looks after me all ways possible ie financially etc howvere i cant get over the fact thgat he managed to have 2 kids whilst in a dead marriage and whilst he was dating me..what do i do? i have spent the two years dating other people and tried the passion thing only to find it was more pain than it was worth. im 36...THE CLOCK IS BANGING NOT TICKING ...HELP/PLZ ADVICE
This article and the
January 14, 2010 - 14:57 — Nicole (not verified)This article and the comments really hit home for me. I am 31 and engaged and I am really nervous about tying the knot. The guy I am engaged to is sweet and funny and charming and helps out with the housework. However, he is also terrible with money leaving me to pay for almost all of our bills. When he does have money, he spends it on himself rather than trying to contribute to our mutual bills. He also has a hot temper and I have learned if I ignore it and give him space he calms down but then we never really end up talking about whatever we were arguing about. I want to travel and he could care less about that. I am very career ambitious and he is not and refuses to ever move further than a 5 hour drive away from his hometown/parents. I feel like I am being forced to choose between following my dreams (travel and career) and having a secure relationship with a nice guy. It would have been easier for me to leave him 5 years ago but I am really wary of going back into the dating scene at 31. Ugh!
Listen to your instincts. I
January 24, 2010 - 21:39 — Visitor (not verified)Listen to your instincts. I would particularly pay attention to the "hot temper".